I was asked by my wife to read this as some friends of hers had read it and got a lot out of it. At the moment I've got through Part 1 (of 3) but thought I'd post some initial thoughts here.
Firstly, I'm not one adverse to the idea of listening to God. I try to do 3 sessions of silent meditation each week in order to listen to God.
My first overwhelming impression is that his theological exposition in the book is woeful. This starts with Jersak’s interpretation of John 10 which kind of underpins the book. Basically takes what the gospel writer even describes as a “figure of speech” (John 10:6) to mean that the follower of Christ can literally hear Jesus voice. The book (so far) is full of similar ways of reading scripture like confusing "The word" as expressed by Jesus in the gospels with the charismatic understanding of "a word". I found this is very frustrating.
None the less I put this behind me. Just because someone has a bad biblical exposition doesn't necessarily mean what they have to say is bad. This is something I honestly believe. Besides, the little blurb on his "Kissing the Leper" book looks pretty good.
The book is not all bad by any means I thought his section on the ways of hearing God (Invitation, Scripture, Teachers, Worship, Conviction of Right & Wrong, A Burden for Others and Prompting) was quite helpful. My problem is not the idea that people hear God but rather exactly how that happens and how we should expect that too happen.
Let me start by explaining how I think we hear God. I‘ve have alluded to this a little in my previous “Me and God like a Jazz Band” post. My thought is that God is playing a jazz rhythm track and we are playing a solo. So like a jazz musician we can play in harmony with that track or in dissonance, but even when we are playing in harmony there is a huge amount of freedom in what we play. So for me hearing God is really about hearing that rhythm track and responding in harmony to that in a me kind of way.
The difference between what me and what I think Jersak is saying is that I have a backing track to which I improvise where Jersak is looking for a particular set of notes that God wants him (us) to play. Hence he gives examples of being told by God to talk to a particular stranger sitting in a coffee shop or get off a road just before a truck is coming. Now I don’t deny that this is possible my worry is when people expect this to be the norm, because my experience is that for most Xns this is not the norm. Nor should it be. To me this is like the difference between having God's Spirit and having God's instruction. If you think of someone doing something in say the spirit of Martin Luther King (MLK) you could imagine what that might be like (and there would be endless possibilities of what that might look like). They would not necessarily use words by MLK. It would be a combination of the essence of MLK and the person doing the thing. To receive instruction is just to do what someone says. To me to have God’s spirit and to listen to God is not about getting direct words from God (although at times this can happen) it’s about hearing that rhythm track and playing something appropriate. In fact as we grow as Xns you might expect to hear even less direct instruction from God, just like a music student might.
When Jersak asks “Is that God or just your imagination?”. My thought is that it's both. To me our imagination in prayer is like listening to a complete jazz song and asking is that the solo or is that the rhythm track? They cannot be separated. I fear that Jersak does that and belittles humans in the process. One example is when he describes Nicola Telsa’s vision of Alternating Current as a vision from God. I’d argue that in fact that was Tesla’s idea, an idea discovered because of the way God had created him but none the less his idea and his imagination. Imagination is great and important for Xns. Imagination is the conduit between what we know about God and how we apply it in our context. Imagination is how we ask what would Jesus do in this situation? Otherwise Xns would be turning up to weddings and trying to turn water into wine or sitting at home waiting for a vision about which tie to wear.
As you can see this has been a hard book as it’s made me do lots of thinking. It’s a book with many things in it that I agree with just not from the angle that those things are being presented. None the less I will keep listening to God but I won’t be expecting any specific instructions, I won’t deny that it’s possible, all I won’t to do is be in harmony with my creator.
Firstly, I'm not one adverse to the idea of listening to God. I try to do 3 sessions of silent meditation each week in order to listen to God.
My first overwhelming impression is that his theological exposition in the book is woeful. This starts with Jersak’s interpretation of John 10 which kind of underpins the book. Basically takes what the gospel writer even describes as a “figure of speech” (John 10:6) to mean that the follower of Christ can literally hear Jesus voice. The book (so far) is full of similar ways of reading scripture like confusing "The word" as expressed by Jesus in the gospels with the charismatic understanding of "a word". I found this is very frustrating.
None the less I put this behind me. Just because someone has a bad biblical exposition doesn't necessarily mean what they have to say is bad. This is something I honestly believe. Besides, the little blurb on his "Kissing the Leper" book looks pretty good.
The book is not all bad by any means I thought his section on the ways of hearing God (Invitation, Scripture, Teachers, Worship, Conviction of Right & Wrong, A Burden for Others and Prompting) was quite helpful. My problem is not the idea that people hear God but rather exactly how that happens and how we should expect that too happen.
Let me start by explaining how I think we hear God. I‘ve have alluded to this a little in my previous “Me and God like a Jazz Band” post. My thought is that God is playing a jazz rhythm track and we are playing a solo. So like a jazz musician we can play in harmony with that track or in dissonance, but even when we are playing in harmony there is a huge amount of freedom in what we play. So for me hearing God is really about hearing that rhythm track and responding in harmony to that in a me kind of way.
The difference between what me and what I think Jersak is saying is that I have a backing track to which I improvise where Jersak is looking for a particular set of notes that God wants him (us) to play. Hence he gives examples of being told by God to talk to a particular stranger sitting in a coffee shop or get off a road just before a truck is coming. Now I don’t deny that this is possible my worry is when people expect this to be the norm, because my experience is that for most Xns this is not the norm. Nor should it be. To me this is like the difference between having God's Spirit and having God's instruction. If you think of someone doing something in say the spirit of Martin Luther King (MLK) you could imagine what that might be like (and there would be endless possibilities of what that might look like). They would not necessarily use words by MLK. It would be a combination of the essence of MLK and the person doing the thing. To receive instruction is just to do what someone says. To me to have God’s spirit and to listen to God is not about getting direct words from God (although at times this can happen) it’s about hearing that rhythm track and playing something appropriate. In fact as we grow as Xns you might expect to hear even less direct instruction from God, just like a music student might.
When Jersak asks “Is that God or just your imagination?”. My thought is that it's both. To me our imagination in prayer is like listening to a complete jazz song and asking is that the solo or is that the rhythm track? They cannot be separated. I fear that Jersak does that and belittles humans in the process. One example is when he describes Nicola Telsa’s vision of Alternating Current as a vision from God. I’d argue that in fact that was Tesla’s idea, an idea discovered because of the way God had created him but none the less his idea and his imagination. Imagination is great and important for Xns. Imagination is the conduit between what we know about God and how we apply it in our context. Imagination is how we ask what would Jesus do in this situation? Otherwise Xns would be turning up to weddings and trying to turn water into wine or sitting at home waiting for a vision about which tie to wear.
As you can see this has been a hard book as it’s made me do lots of thinking. It’s a book with many things in it that I agree with just not from the angle that those things are being presented. None the less I will keep listening to God but I won’t be expecting any specific instructions, I won’t deny that it’s possible, all I won’t to do is be in harmony with my creator.
13 comments:
Thanks for the review. It seems to me that where we would disagree is not in THAT God speaks but in HOW God speaks.
While I found your jazz analogy interesting, it seemed overly abstract--perhaps a hangover from modernism--to the degree that you showed us how God can speak without actually doing so.
Thus, I wasn't too surprised that you wrote off Jesus' promise that his sheep hear and recognize his voice as nothing more than a figure of speech (meaning nothing?)... You might want to dig deeper on the exposition of John 10, esp. in the broader context of Johannine literature and the promise of the Spirit who "guides," "speaks," "tells," "counsels," "teaches," etc. Certainly more is promised than some jazzy background music.
Further, I was a little bewildered that you disregarded the many ways which God speaks that I drew directly from the Scriptures. It's one thing to say that "I'm looking for a particular set of notes"... but let's leave the analogy behind for a moment.
What I'm looking for is a living Person who promised to speak and who does speak--to specific issues in great detail--who is perpetually knocking on the door and asking to speak daily into the minutae of our lives.
This is the promise and testimony of Scripture that is filled with far more than background noise, however lovely. And it's been our experience as well: that when we call, he answers... like a friend or spouse or father. Not just a rhythm section.
For what it's worth,
Brad Jersak
Hey Brad,
Is that really you? Either way thanks for the comments.
Firstly and least importantly...
How did you find out about this blog and my reflection / review on your book?
Secondly in regards to your comments...
The "figure of speech" comment was actually quote from John 10:6 (NRSV version) "Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them." So it was John who first called what Jesus said a figure of speech and I think that just because something is a figure of speech doesn't mean that it means "nothing".
One of the reasons for the Jazz analogy and describing God as like a rhythm section was that a rhythm section is more than background music. I didn't describe God as "background noise" or music because I think that ignores that how God can influence people without speaking to them in a more direct manner. You can ignore background noise but if you're a soloist you can't ignore the rhythm section. It guides you and pushes you in certain directions.
Even though I like my Jazz analogy I have no doubt that God has spoken directly to people in scripture and speaks directly to people today. What I do doubt is that this is God's only or even primary means of communication with us today. So while I agree with you that God does speak I would disagree that it will always be about "specific issues in great detail" and "daily into the minutae of our lives" in the way that I think you have described. For me I think that part of the way that God transforms us to become more like Christ is by transforming who we are so that we can respond to others in a Christ like manner, rather than giving us specific instructions in specific cases about what is Christ like in that situation. Of course, I don't disagree that this can and does happen I just don't think it is Gods primary means of communication. I know that to some this may sound a bit disconnected with God and perhaps even a bit modernist. For me I actually feel like my life is richer rather poorer for this kind of relationship. I feel like God is teaching me how to fish rather than telling me where the fish is every time I am hungry.
I'm not sure if it's the "promise and testimony of Scripture" that we'll always hear from God in the way you have described. I agree that the spirit "guides, speaks, tells, counsels, teaches etc..." Although I'm not sure that this means that relationship will be like the more obvious speaking to us directly relationship I think you are describing. This doesn't exclude the possibility of that neither does it exclude the personal nature of a relationship with God.
Having said all this one of the reasons I wrote these reflections was because I know of a lot of Xns who have got a lot out of this book. I certainly felt like my opinion was in a minority when I wrote this post. However I didn't feel like a lone voice. I knew of other Xns who don't feel like they hear God in the more direct way that you describe, but who I feel are still growing as Xns and responding to God. Also my reflection / review of the book was quite harsh in places, this wasn't meant to be personal (I'm sincerely sorry if it came across that way). I certainly was harsher than what I might be with a friend or a college and that was purely because this is a published book and therefore does have weight of authority to it. In a similar I might be harsher or more direct talking about the political ideas of a prime minister or president than I would someone else without significant political influence.
Finally, for anyone else reading this. This is not meant to be a critique of Brad Jersak himself just some of the ideas in this one book. In the big scheme of things I think ther are more important things thab how we hear God. Anyone who writes a book about seeing Jesus in the disabled, the children, the prodigals, and the poor sounds like a pretty good guy to me.
is the discussion over?
surely not...this was just starting to get interesting.
you both appear to hold radically different views. exploring each others point of view further must surely take you to even more interesting places.
though i hold no firm position on how God speaks i do believe its an important question to continually wrestle with. i have experienced the direct "guess what you are doing next...", the dream foretelling, as well as subtle knowing the rhythm god has driven me forward with and willing to keep moving.
come on lets see a healthy debate from two polar opposites to see where the common ground ultimately lies
Hey Frogtheology,
I'm up for it if Brad is. After all I guess I started it. I think one think that I'd like to emphasise is that I'm not saying that God doesn't speak in a clear direct manner. I'm simply saying that I'm not sure that God is always going to be speaking like that. Sometimes God is a pillar of fire other times God is a still small voice.
I think that Brad and I have a fair bit of common ground perhaps like two artists one who uses paints one who uses photography. Both capture a moment and both are different from each other but there is lots of common ground too.
Besides Brad might be too busy too repsond to an obscure blog like mine.
Hi, I came across your post when looking up information about Brads book. I found the dialogue between Brad and yourself very interesting and a good reminder (and/or realisation) that for each individual God has a way he chooses to speak to us best, so finding a book that might give one persons answer (and possibly many others) won't always be the answer for myself (or others looking for such an answer).
So, thanks to both of you, when I do go and buy this book, I will be aware that God has something personal planned for me, and he can speak to me through this book in whichever way he chooses :-)
Thankyou so much.
No Worries! Thanks for reading Alan
Hi There,
I have read these comments and I think you are both seeing different sides of the same coin. Scripture states that God is always speaking, in many ways, and therefore I think you can conclude that we people miss a lot of his Words, only tune into what we are disciplined in, or comfortable with or open to. He often repeats himself, probably to keep us reassured that he was speaking in the first place to us. He is a person, and all of scripture tells the story of his various ways of intervening in his people's lives. He is pretty creative! But it is not all about just one way, in fact, just when we think we have a corner on something about his ways, he shakes us up. This is good, since we are terribly possessive about how to get religious and proud. We have great tools, as outlined inscripture in how to discern and test all things we feel we are hearing in whatever manner it come from the Lord. Brad's book highlights some of these tests, points out false tests we tend to pick up along the way, and reassures readers that they have been hearing all along even if they feel they havent. HE uses scripture's prescriptions to outline how to discern these words we are recieving. I am glad to have seen this processing so respectfully online! THANKS.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for being respectful towards differing opinions.. I think that's important. I would just encourage you to search the scriptures and ask God for insight into what they mean.
Our God spoke in the past in many different ways (as recorded in the Bible) and God is forever unchanging- he still speaks now, to ordinary people everyday, in a vast number of different ways.. like those Brad listed in his book.
I for one am forever grateful for the tools and listening exercises Brad has provided in his book. They have changed the way I live and I find that I truly am walking in God's way, with him saying to me "This is the way, walk in it" on sometimes the very smallest details of my life.
It has been an amazing blessing and I would love for you to experience that as well.. because if you're not... man, you're missing out!
God bless! :)
Anita
Hi Chris!
I have read "Can you hear me" and been to many listening prayer conferences that explain in detail the ways in which God speaks.Perhaps if you have a second read of the book and Brads intrduction to the book you will see that no where does he ever say that when God speaks it will always be about "specific issues in great detail" and "daily into the minutae of our lives"! He describes this as one way but the book is about the many ways that God speaks and he covers these ways using scripture. All the ways God speaks as described in the Bible. There are so many and thank God we are made to be and hear in these many different ways. Plus some of us, like me, only hear certain ways. Others get to hear in everyway. Also it is in this book where we get to learn that God is and has already been speaking to us, and this is awsome for those who think God doesn't speak to them.
God wants us to have a 'face to face' intimate relationship with Him. He wants to be our friend and visa-versa and as we get closer by spending more alone time with Jesus we begin to hear Him in more direct ways.
Blessings to you!
Kenneth
...the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true (Acts 17:11).
I met some people who actually heard God's instructions as well as the people who believe Jesus speaks to us today, yet not live as if that is going to really happen. I think we like arguing and believing that we could induce some sound ideas or conclusions through discussion. But more than reasonable and sound arguments, I now rather trust a sincere heart that examines and validates this kind of matter in the Holy Spirit by living it and testing it. I found nothing radical or not biblical in Brad's book, but rather learned many practical ways to live out my faith.
When I think of Brad Jersak three things come to mind: 1. Money, 2. Book sales, and 3. Charismatic nonsense.
Brad hears God speak to him audibly, just like Moses did, well, what is next? Is Brad Jersak going to walk on water too, just like Peter did? or is Brad Jersak going to raise people physically from the dead like the Apostles did?
Hmmmmm Let me know when Brad Jersak is goin to walk on water ... I do want to see that hahahahaha
Hey Brad, since you read the posts in here, when are you going to see that God already has spoken to us clearly and unmistakably and we can hear Him speak clearly and unmistakably through His Word, our Bible? Maybe the Bible is not enough for you and you want a "live-feed" from God instead ... well, try listening to God by hearing the Word of God as you study it and are led by the Holy Spirit. You don't need to write a book about the Book of Prayer and Meditation, when the Book of Prayer and Meditation, our Bible is God's way of communicating with us and us with Him
I have read about 75% of Brad's book and although I do agree strongly with some of what he says, I have come to the conclusion that as a whole, Brad’s concept of ‘listening prayer’ is just not biblical.
Why? Well for starters, Brad does a wonderful job of taking a huge amount of scripture completely out of context which is surprising considering his background. This includes the famous John 10 quote that charismatic’s never fail to use, as well as Revelation 3:20 among many others. Revelation 3:20 has NOTHING to do with Jesus inviting us into some sort of weird new age mystical conversation. That verse was a letter written to a specific church in a city for a specific reason. Brad takes figures of speech and poetry and takes their literal meaning to base his case on. One problem: That not how the bible works, but that is how false teachers parade around and that’s also how cults get started. I could write a book alone on Brad’s misuse of scripture but I’ll move onto a few other things.
Besides the poor use of scripture throughout this book, one of the other major things that bothers me is the fact that Brad seems to be very heavily influenced by Roman Catholic mystics. Any true bible scholar worth his salt knows that the Catholic Church is not a true Christian church but is ripe with heresy, idolatry, scandal, pope worship, Mary worship, ect. As far as mysticism goes, that has more in common with the new age/ occult that anything related to the bible. The fact is, mysticism is not biblical and will mess up anyone who uses it and God would never ask his people to use a technique that has the potential to damage them or be used by Satan to deceive them.
Furthermore, NOTHING in scripture encourages the reader to go into some kind of ’meeting place’ and ’behold the face of God’ or to visualize healing an individual or whatever other tomfoolery is laid out in this book. And Brad, I don’t know what you think you’ve seen, but you CANNOT see the face of God weather directly or indirectly!
I also find it amusing that Brad mentions one of his biggest influences into this sort of thing came from Todd Bentley, another one of those so called healing prophets. Todd Bentley is a charlatan who kicks old ladies in the head in order to cure them while committing idolatry with other women. Not someone I’d want to associate myself with and I don’t understand why Brad would either. According to this section of the book, it seems that Brad basis his truth on an experience and then shapes his biblical doctrine to fit the experience which is how so much scripture get’s twisted. The reality is, experience is no basis for truth. Brad even goes so far as to say more or less that is the spirit leads you into truth outside of the bible, what’s the problem? Well the problem is, the written word is our guideline and source or correction, teaching, reproof, ect. NOTHING else! No private revelations or “God told me so it must be true”. Anyone who goes outside of what the word says is opening themselves up to deception. PERIOD. A visit to the FAQ section of one of Brad’s websites is a question titled “Are you sure this isn‘t new age?”, to which Brad says “Very sure”. VERY SURE!? That doesn’t sound very biblical or reassuring Brad! That to me sounds like nothing more than an opinion. What if you’re wrong? He then goes on without using ANY scriptural references whatsoever to prove that what he is promoting is biblical.
In closing, I would say that ’listening prayer’ and everything else in this book is nothing new. It’s just more charismatic hog wash to push the individual into having an experience with God. And that’s why it will appeal to people. They want to have an experience, they want to know God, they are willing to do almost anything - but they aren’t willing to read his word! If anyone wants to know anything about true solid biblical prayer, they should study the Lord’s prayer. That’s exactly what it is there for and everyone already knows it anyway so skip “Can you hear me?” and study that instead.
Post a Comment